Fwd: Re: A Possible Solution to the Mayan Calendar Enigma

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view

Fwd: Re: A Possible Solution to the Mayan Calendar Enigma

clifford emeric

-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: A Possible Solution to the Mayan Calendar Enigma
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2018 13:09:08 -0800
From: Clifford Emeric [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]

Hi Karl, Peter, and Others

Over a month ago I suggested a more focused study of my monograph on the Palenque Temple XIX inscriptions, to focus on the basic elements of reconstituting the mythological astronomy of protracted intervals. To that end I have uploaded a shorter version that focuses on just one Initial Series (G-I's accession date), showing how the application of period residual arithmetic may be used to decipher what the inscriptions are actually talking about. The main body of the text is much more manageable and demonstrates an exact match between the text of the inscriptions and the derived astronomy, showing how modulo period residuals served as calendric proper fractions. This is a bid to reduce speculations on the Mayans calendar's internal structure - in short the Mayan inscriptions themselves are the highest authority about this calendar, and this shows how to distill this information. This is a different study than the use of LCM residuals to derive purist temporal structures, and focuses directly on the astronomy itself. This definitively resolves the Mayan correlation question by identifying an match with the inscriptions.

LINK to paper: https://www.academia.edu/37959739/Reconstituted_Protracted_Spans

I think you will find this shorter version a more focused presentation of the computations. Much of the supporting data has been relegated to the appendices so they do not clutter the main body of the text.

Regards Cliff

On 10/24/2018 6:59 AM, Peter Meyer wrote:
Karl said:

I'm not reading this. The conditions academia,edu impose are not
acceptable to me.

When you request
a page comes up offering four choices:
(1) download with Google
(2) download with Facebook
(3) download with email
(4) read paper.

(1) and (2) are conspicuous.  (3) is in small print.  (4) is grayed out
but mousing over it reveals it more clearly.  (1)-(3) require signing
up.  Once signed up, Academia.edu often prompts you to upgrade for
$99/year.  But there's no need to upgrade unless you want to see which
papers are citing yours, etc.  I can easily resist this temptation.

And you don't have to sign up just to read the paper.  Just mousey on
down and click on "READ PAPER".